Horological Meandering

Jos.
158

• Show profile
• Show other posts

Counter-counter-point...

... there's an essential difference between "fakes" (or ripoffs, or counterfeits) on the one hand, and "replicas" on th'other. John Ireland said it very well in a post on this forum a month ago: click here

John's main point (with which I wholeheartedly agree) is that  the difference mainly lies in intent. A counterfeiter intends to deceive, someone like Bill Yao does not. I would like to add to that the criteria of 'transparency'. Counterfeiters try to hide the fact that theirs is not the real product, replica makers are transparent about their products in terms of advertising, communication, and documentation.

I realise that many counterfeiters try to further their trade by posing as 'replica makers' but this is an abuse of the word, as their behaviour is an abuse of IP rights.

And finally, what is criticised here is not so much the fact that Armani follow GO's design very closely, as do others who lack creativity of their own. This behaviour is, although objectionable, not illegal. But what IS being criticised here is the fact that Armani further the counterfeiters' cause by adding a 'legitimate' dimension to their business.

Regards,
Jos.